LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

cyberlawyer (barrister)     01 September 2010

PLZ EXPLAIN THIS ORDER AND GIVE CITATION

Hello lawyers, in my client's case (suit for declaration and handover possession) there are two plaintiffs, himself and his brother. After the cross exmn of PW1 (plaintiff) he brought 5 documents which are allowed through additional docs. petition. The affidavit is sworn by the plaintiff. Subsequently his brother was impleaded as the 2nd plaintiff. We tried to mark those 5 docs. through his brother, and other side objected saying since his brother was not a party at the time of allowing the additional documents petition.  he his barred from marking those documents. The judge also admitted his statement..

We were told by the judge that 1st plaintiff can mark those docs.after he is recalled. So we filed a recall petition which was countered by the other side. After hearing both the sides the petition was dismissed on merits  by the following order.

"AS THE PW1 IS SOUGHT RECALL AND THERE WILL BE NO PREJUDICE AT THIS STAGE, THE PETITION TO RECALL PW1 IS SOUGHT TO BE ENTERTAINED. BUT THERE CANNOT BE ANY APPLICATION FOR RECALLING BY A PROPOSED PARTY WITHOUT COMING TO PARTY ARRAY. HENCE THIS PETITION IS DISMISSED AS ITS DEVOID OF MERITS"

We could not understand the above order and asked the judge. Judge was bluffing something and finally he told that the drafting section committed a mistake in wrongly typing a order belonging to a different petition. So he asked us to file a review application against the dismissal of recall petition.

We filed review pet. During the enquiry session of the review application judge told that since the 2nd plaintiff was stated as proposed plaintiff he passed such an order in recall pet.  (In the recall petition there was a minor typographical error , i.e., the 2nd plaintiff was wrongly stated as proposed plaintiff).

We made it clear to him that it was only a typing error and the 2nd plaintiff was already impleaded as a party. He told that he will pass orders and we were thinking that the review pet. will be allowed.

For 3 hearings he was just posting the matter for C/o (call on) and subsequently vacation started. After the vacation the old judge was replaced by a new judge and he has no idea what order to pass since he himself isnt able to understand the order passed in recall pet. Unless he understands it he cant pass orders in the connected review pet.   Then we explained to him everything clearly and he told that order in a review application can be passed only by the same judge who passed order in the connected recall pet. He assured that he will favour us if we produce any citation to show that a diff. judge has authority to pass orders in this review application...

1) Plz provide me the exact meaning of the above  order

2) Plz provide citation to show that even a diff. judge can pass orders in review appl...

Thanx in advance...



 1 Replies

Srinivas (Director)     01 September 2010

O18R15[1] may be relevant to show a different judge can deal with evidence, memorandums, etc already presented.  This is a good question for experts !...


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads

LCI Learning Hindu Laws


Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query